Celice Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 What do you call a red bucket that's red? In the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bottlegnomes Posted May 6, 2012 Share Posted May 6, 2012 I don't know how else to refer it as other than "common sense", but it's that sense of morality that allows you to tell what's wrong and what is right without their being any laws to tell you. For example, one isn't taught that killing a person is wrong. You learn it by yourself. I haven't read the whole topic, feeling lazy, but I had to address this. Actually, you are very much taught that killing is wrong. Someone might not sit you down and tell you killing is wrong, but you're definitely taught it. As for the general question, this a huge philosophical debate. Personally, I think there is such a thing as inherent morality, but there's a strong case against it. And common sense is sadly uncommon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celice Posted May 6, 2012 Share Posted May 6, 2012 I haven't read the whole topic, feeling lazy, but I had to address this. Actually, you are very much taught that killing is wrong. Someone might not sit you down and tell you killing is wrong, but you're definitely taught it. As for the general question, this a huge philosophical debate. Personally, I think there is such a thing as inherent morality, but there's a strong case against it. And from whence does this moral realism come? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bottlegnomes Posted May 6, 2012 Share Posted May 6, 2012 And from whence does this moral realism come? IMO God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celice Posted May 6, 2012 Share Posted May 6, 2012 IMO God. Cue problem of evil in an existence created and governed by omnipotent all-good being (which is then inconsistent) :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bottlegnomes Posted May 6, 2012 Share Posted May 6, 2012 Cue problem of evil in an existence created and governed by omnipotent all-good being (which is then inconsistent) :( Cue we can't know how God works, because his ways are beyond us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Original Alear Posted May 6, 2012 Share Posted May 6, 2012 When I was talking about inherent morality, what I was talking about was not so much, whether there are moral tenets which are absolutely true, but rather whether human beings generally (since common sense is not necessarily universal) have some sort of proclivity towards a certain set of behaviors/values. The way that bottlegnomes phrased it, he believes in something called inherent morality, but not that it is common sense or inherent to humans, which is what Soul was talking about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bottlegnomes Posted May 6, 2012 Share Posted May 6, 2012 (edited) When I was talking about inherent morality, what I was talking about was not so much, whether there are moral tenets which are absolutely true, but rather whether human beings generally (since common sense is not necessarily universal) have some sort of proclivity towards a certain set of behaviors/values. The way that bottlegnomes phrased it, he believes in something called inherent morality, but not that it is common sense or inherent to humans, which is what Soul was talking about. I also adressed common sense. And common sense is sadly uncommon. As for what you're talking about, that's pretty much in the same situation. There are strong cases both ways. But personally, I would say that people have certain predispositions due to evolution. Edited May 6, 2012 by bottlegnomes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rehab Posted May 6, 2012 Share Posted May 6, 2012 (edited) Cue we can't know how God works, because his ways are beyond us. You're going to have to fill me in on how your line of thinking completes. Is it that the teaching that killing is wrong comes from somebody/thing we can't understand and have to take for granted? I agree that we're very much taught killing is wrong in a bunch of ways, but I don't see a complete thought there if the source is simply God. Edited May 6, 2012 by Rehab Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Raven Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 He said "cue" or w/e, so i don't think he was being particularly serious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rehab Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 I have been ruined, obviously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bottlegnomes Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 You're going to have to fill me in on how your line of thinking completes. Is it that the teaching that killing is wrong comes from somebody/thing we can't understand and have to take for granted? I agree that we're very much taught killing is wrong in a bunch of ways, but I don't see a complete thought there if the source is simply God. Raven's right. I was just being an ass because Celice was. Anyway, the idea basically says we can't actually know how people other than ourselves think. Since we have significantly more in common with other people than with God, we can know how he works and thinks even less. Since He's generally believed to be significantly beyond humans, trying to understand him would be like a 5 year old trying to learn calculus. So there's really two ways to go with the existence of evil. Either we can assume God isn't all powerful, so can't control everything, or, along the same lines, we can assume He's not all benevolent, so doesn't really care that evil exists, or really anything along those lines. The other, which is the one I ascribe to, is the later and basically says since we can't understand God fully we just have faith that He has the best intentions for us and everything has a good reason behind it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Sage Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 The OP proves common sense is uncommon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel M Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Of course. Common sense is only found on Batman. Because it's his superpower. Fuck everyone should know this! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celice Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Raven's right. I was just being an ass because Celice was. Sorry you feel that way bro :( I was actually genuinely curious as to what your reason was, but your reason ends up begetting that problem--which, you just accepted in this later post. Though to be honest right back to ya, I'm really let down that that's the best reason you can come up with :/ I was hoping to hear something new, not a rabbit-hat answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bottlegnomes Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Sorry you feel that way bro :( I was actually genuinely curious as to what your reason was, but your reason ends up begetting that problem--which, you just accepted in this later post. Though to be honest right back to ya, I'm really let down that that's the best reason you can come up with :/ I was hoping to hear something new, not a rabbit-hat answer. Sorry I mistook your statement as just being an attack on religious people. I've dealt with too many atheists who just want to be smug and make religious people look stupid, so I get a little annoyed when I feel like people are doing that. If you genuinely want to have a discussion about it, I'm more than willing to. Anyway, that is the only justification for it. I know enough about philosophy and religion to know that any of the other justifications can be disproved. But that one you can't. I do believe in God, so I am predisposed to defending HIs existence, and that one is the only one that makes sense to me, so that's why I use it. Though I have come up with a fun little defense for believing in some sort of god being a safer bet than not believing in some sort of god. I sort of want to keep this on topic so if you're interested, I'll PM it to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celice Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Sorry I mistook your statement as just being an attack on religious people. I've dealt with too many atheists who just want to be smug and make religious people look stupid, so I get a little annoyed when I feel like people are doing that. If you genuinely want to have a discussion about it, I'm more than willing to. Anyway, that is the only justification for it. I know enough about philosophy and religion to know that any of the other justifications can be disproved. But that one you can't. I do believe in God, so I am predisposed to defending HIs existence, and that one is the only one that makes sense to me, so that's why I use it. Though I have come up with a fun little defense for believing in some sort of god being a safer bet than not believing in some sort of god. I sort of want to keep this on topic so if you're interested, I'll PM it to you. Yeah, I'd be interested in hearing it. Personally, the argument I've best jived with (in admitting something like God) is that free-will is the origin of unconsidered evil--that God may create an existence just as it is, but the human element just isn't as "pure" for it. We feel in ways that God's creation simply didn't account for--or rather that it had, before God's punishment (this being mostly the Christian God over other versions of the concept). Then we simply "unraveled," and felt our existence more acutely. Free-will also accounts for evils unconsidered by God during a creation. Though again, this doesn't necessarily counteract any of the evils in an existence posited by a God; however, it does qualify it perhaps in a more designated manner, that being which our perception and subjection of evils is something God designated to humans after the creation of all things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bottlegnomes Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Yeah, I'd be interested in hearing it. Personally, the argument I've best jived with (in admitting something like God) is that free-will is the origin of unconsidered evil--that God may create an existence just as it is, but the human element just isn't as "pure" for it. We feel in ways that God's creation simply didn't account for--or rather that it had, before God's punishment (this being mostly the Christian God over other versions of the concept). Then we simply "unraveled," and felt our existence more acutely. Free-will also accounts for evils unconsidered by God during a creation. Though again, this doesn't necessarily counteract any of the evils in an existence posited by a God; however, it does qualify it perhaps in a more designated manner, that being which our perception and subjection of evils is something God designated to humans after the creation of all things. Just blew up your wall as well as sending a PM because I didn't think the wall posts showed up. Back on topic, as everyone has said, I think common sense is the wrong name for the thing because of how uncommon it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Percivalé Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 (edited) Everything is subjective. Everything is relative. What is common sense to some isn't common sense to everyone. In fact, it's kind of preposterous/elitist to even call it by that name, in my opinion. Edited May 7, 2012 by Levantamos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewjeo Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 What about basic things like driving your car full speed into the Grand Canyon is bad for your survival? Is that something people really need to be told to know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blademaster! Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Everything is subjective. Everything is relative. What is common sense to some isn't common sense to everyone. Common sense is an objective quality by nature when defined as actions a being takes to preserve its life, along with the lives of its future generations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Excellen Browning Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 (edited) Everything is subjective. Everything is relative. What is common sense to some isn't common sense to everyone. In fact, it's kind of preposterous/elitist to even call it by that name, in my opinion. I think that's a little bit naive, because life is like a NOC mafia game so you can make educated guesses at least, but I'm really interested in what this will turn into over the next 3 or so years.Also, you always have a benchmark; yourself. Edited May 7, 2012 by Daigoji Excellen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celice Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Common sense is an objective quality by nature when defined as actions a being takes to preserve its life, along with the lives of its future generations. Which then is relative? What seems to play out for survival is dependent on the life in question, its circumstances and requirements, and its own innate struggle to survive. The common sense of ivy is hardly equatable to the common sense of the turtle, the dog, or the insect without overly generalizing and becoming lost in the process. Generalizing is the bane of understanding. What about basic things like driving your car full speed into the Grand Canyon is bad for your survival? Is that something people really need to be told to know? You know, living is bad for your survival. Eating is bad for your survival, as is sleeping. We're contingent beings--nothing is ever "good" for our survival specifically. It only delays an inevitable (as far as all things appear). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewjeo Posted May 8, 2012 Share Posted May 8, 2012 (edited) You know, living is bad for your survival. Eating is bad for your survival, as is sleeping. We're contingent beings--nothing is ever "good" for our survival specifically. It only delays an inevitable (as far as all things appear). Just like how cutting your hair doesn't make it shorter because it will grow back out again? Edited May 8, 2012 by Rewjeo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FabledTome Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 You know, most people aren't that smart, OP. However social they may behave. Case in point - You know, living is bad for your survival. Eating is bad for your survival, as is sleeping. We're contingent beings--nothing is ever "good" for our survival specifically. It only delays an inevitable (as far as all things appear). Wow........this is what you think constitutes a sound viewpoint on living? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.